Jump to content

Nikkor 180 vs Tamron 180 macro


arnulfo_rosas

Recommended Posts

I have a F80 & 24/50/85 mm AF system and want to add a lens in the

105-180mm range for macro and general applications; the options I

have considered are:

1. Nikkor 105 2.8 AF macro (+/- $500)

2. Nikkor 180 2.8 AF (+/- $600)

3. Tamron 180 macro 2.8 (+/- $600?)

 

As Opt 1 is pretty close to my 85mm 1.8 and Opt 2 does not have macro

capabilities, Opt 3 seems to be a fair choice. However I am well

aware the Nikkor 180mm is a superb lens and macro lenses are not

supposed to be ideal for general purposes (a possible drawback of the

Tamron) . So my dilemma is,

 

a. Buy the Tamron (...and probably sacrifying general purpose

applications like portraiture).

b. Buy the Nikkors 105 & 180 (...a good choice but more expensive and

the 105 almost overlapping the 85)

c. Buy a Sigma 105 & Nikkor 180 (almost as good as (b) but a bit

cheaper)

 

I will appreciate any piece of advise.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, I've seen excellent results from the Tamron, which is a 180mm f/3.5 and sells for $700:

 

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/controller/home?O=productlist&A=details&Q=&sku=284406&is=REG

 

Your other choice in Nikon would be the 200mm f/4.0 micro-Nikkor, which sells for $1,350:

 

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/controller/home?O=productlist&A=details&Q=&sku=284406&is=REG

 

The 180mm f/2.8 ED Nikkor is superb, but, as you note, isn't a macro lens. And the 180mm f/2.8 ED sells for $680:

 

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/controller/home?O=productlist&A=details&Q=&sku=92012&is=USA

 

Frankly, the 180mm f/2.8 ED Nikkor is not a particularly hot seller, due to Nikon's pro zooms. Especially on your N80 that has annoyingly slow and noisy focusing, the newish 70-200mm f/2.8 G lens has ED glass, it has fast "S" focusing and it gives you great range; though the price is admittedly painful:

 

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/controller/home?O=productlist&A=details&Q=&sku=274780&is=USA

 

If you are serious about doing macro, forget overlap and concentrate on the macro function. I'm a fan of the 105mm f/2.8 micro-Nikkor, which is a good general purpose lens, as it is brutally sharp. For portraits, I have generally cut the sharpness of this lens with a Zeiss Softar I filter.

 

The 105mm micro-Nikkor, like most macro lenses gets dissed for its "bokeh." However, unless you do general shooting with out-of-focus backgrounds, bokeh isn't a huge issue.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The 180 mm AF-D is a spectacular lens and I've never noticed that it has slow AF. Imho, it is just fine in that respect. Of course it's not AF-S but it's got the better glass and it's wonderful to operate due to it's compact size and light weight. One of my best buys, and the reason my 80-200 collects dust.

 

I would just get the 105 Micro and the 180/2.8 AF-D. The former is not a good portrait lens, so your 85 fits that role. You can't keep trying to avoid overlap, it'll happen anyway!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

"The 180 mm AF-D is a spectacular lens and I've never noticed that it has slow AF. Imho, it is just fine in that respect. Of course it's not AF-S but it's got the better glass and it's wonderful to operate due to it's compact size and light weight."

 

1. If I were mounting the lens to an F5 or F100, I wouldn't worry about focus speed either as these cameras have the more powerful focusing motors. On an N80 or my D100, I get slow, whiny focus with a 28mm f/1.4.

 

2. Again, you have to zero in on a prime purpose for the lens. When shooting macro, I turn off the AF anyway and use manual focus, as I am generally shooting for a specific reproduction size (e.g.1:1).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have the Nikon 180 2.8 AF and 85mm 1.8, as well as a Tamron 90mm macro (bought each of them used for about $300). They are really three different types of lenses - the 85 1.8 is low light/portrait, the 90 2.8 is macro which can do portrait in a pinch, and the 180 2.8 is portrait/low light telephoto.

 

Right now, I'm looking at the 200 macro because as sharp as the Tamron is, I'd like a little more working distance. The 180 isn't a maco lens. You could add tubes, though.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

"Right now, I'm looking at the 200 macro because as sharp as the Tamron is, I'd like a little more working distance."

 

All you'll get is a little more working distance. The 200mm f/4.0 micro-Nikkor focuses down to 19.4 inches at 1:1. The Tamron 180mm f/3.5 focuses to 18.5 inches at 1:1.

 

If you like your Tamron 90mm, I'd get the Tamron 180mm. 9/10ths of an inch may not be worth twice the price to you.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I shoot a lot of macro (nature related). I shoot the Sigma 180mm 3.5 HSM macro and it is outstanding in terms of image qualty and build. One thing that helps for certain live subjects is that the focus is very quiet. It goes for around $700 at B&H, but I bought it at Delta International (www.deltainternational.com) for $514 incl. shipping.

The fit and finish is quite superb and I find the optics to be on par with any of the pro Nikkors that I am currently using. I also use the Sigma 105 macro and Nikkor 60mm macro. I would still like to try a Nikkor 180mm + extension. These are all outstanding lenses in all regards in my opinion; I don't think you would be disatisfied with whichever you choose. One thing to note; you can get a used or recond. Nikkor AF-D 180mm for around $400 on the auction site and an AIS for about $200-300. You could save a lot! I shop that way often myself and with a little care, it is fairly "safe." Hope this helps.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Are you planning to do a lot of macro photography or "regular" non-macro photography with this new lens? I don't know about the Tamron specificially, but a lot of macro lens are tuned for macro photography so that they are not as sharp at or near infinity.

 

But if you shoot macro, a macro lens with a tripod collar is of great help.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I use the 180 mm a lot but often on a tripod so use MF there. When hand-holding, I do use it on AF, and it performs admirably. It's quieter and seems to lock a bit better than many of my small AF primes. I think AF speed with this lens on F5, F100, F90x bodies is a non-issue and certainly wouldn't keep me from using it. I don't shoot fast-moving subjects with it though, nor would I use AF with it when shooting subjects that are very near. I can see that an action photographer in good light would prefer the 70-200 but for my photography, the 180 is there to stay, while the 80-200 is on its way out.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...